Background Introduction to a multi-professional team who are working and caring for the dying, and facing complex moral and ethical dilemmas during Oncology and Palliative Medicine postings influence a medical student’s professional identity formation (PIF). However, limited appreciation of PIF, inadequate assessments and insufficient support jeopardise this opportunity to shape how medical students think, feel and act as future physicians. To address this gap, a systematic scoping review (SSR) of PIF assessment methods is proposed. Methods A Systematic Evidence-based Approach (SEBA) guided SSR of assessments of PIF in medical schools published between 1st January 2000 and 31st December 2021 in PubMed, Embase, ERIC and Scopus databases was carried out. Included articles were concurrently content and thematically analysed using SEBA’s Split Approach and the themes and categories identified were combined using SEBA’s Jigsaw Perspective. The review hinged on the following questions: “what is known about the assessment of professional identity formation amongst medical students?”, “what are the theories and principles guiding the assessment of professional identity formation amongst medical students?”, “what factors influence PIF in medical students?”, “what are the tools used to assess PIF in medical students?”, and “what considerations impact the implementation of PIF assessment tools amongst medical students?”. Results Two thousand four hundred thirty six abstracts were reviewed, 602 full-text articles were evaluated, and 88 articles were included. The 3 domains identified were 1) theories, 2) assessment, and 3) implementation in assessing PIF. Differing attention to the different aspects of the PIF process impairs evaluations, jeopardise timely and appropriate support of medical students and hinder effective implementation of PIF assessments. Conclusion The Krishna-Pisupati model combines current theories and concepts of PIF to provide a more holistic perspective of the PIF process. Under the aegis of this model, Palliative Care and Oncology postings are envisaged as Communities of Practice influencing self-concepts of personhood and identity and shaping how medical students see their roles and responsibilities as future physicians. These insights allow the forwarding of nine recommendations to improve assessments of PIF and shape the design of a PIF-specific tool that can direct timely and personalized support of medical students.

Introduction The redeployment of mentors and restrictions on in-person face-to-face mentoring meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic has compromised mentoring efforts in Palliative Medicine (PM). Seeking to address these gaps, we evaluate the notion of a combined novice, peer-, near-peer and e-mentoring (CNEP) and interprofessional team-based mentoring (IPT) program. Methods A Systematic Evidence Based Approach (SEBA) guided systematic scoping review was carried out to study accounts of CNEP and IPT from articles published between 1st January 2000 and 28th February 2021. To enhance trustworthiness, concurrent thematic and content analysis of articles identified from structured database search using terms relating to interprofessional, virtual and peer or near-peer mentoring in medical education were employed to bring together the key elements within included articles. Results Fifteen thousand one hundred twenty one abstracts were reviewed, 557 full text articles were evaluated, and 92 articles were included. Four themes and categories were identified and combined using the SEBA’s Jigsaw and Funnelling Process to reveal 4 domains - characteristics, mentoring stages, assessment methods, and host organizations. These domains suggest that CNEP’s structured virtual and near-peer mentoring process complement IPT’s accessible and non-hierarchical approach under the oversight of the host organizations to create a robust mentoring program. Conclusion This systematic scoping review forwards an evidence-based framework to guide a CNEP-IPT program. At the same time, more research into the training and assessment methods of mentors, near peers and mentees, the dynamics of mentoring interactions and the longitudinal support of the mentoring relationships and programs should be carried out.

Background Efforts to support flagging mentoring programs facing shortages of experienced clinical mentors have had an unexpected and welcome effect. Supplementing traditional mentoring programs with peer-mentoring have not only addressed gaps in practice, structure, support and mentee oversight but have offered mentees charged with peer-mentoring duties the opportunity to take on mentoring roles under senior supervision. This study evaluates the experiences of peer-mentors within a local research mentoring program to better understand and advance this endeavor. Methods Semi-structured interviews and post-interview surveys based on recent reviews on mentoring were employed. Adapting the Systematic Evidence Based Approach, data was analysed using thematic and content analysis. Results were combined using the Jigsaw Perspective to ensure that key elements of the different mentoring stages were identified. Results The interviews and surveys revealed the following domains: Motivation, Initiation, Practicing, and Mentoring Environment. Conclusion These findings provide novel insight into a structured framework that may help guide the experiences, training, assessment, and oversight of peer-mentors beyond the auspices of our local program. These general observations will equip host organizations with the direction they need to take in designing and executing peer-mentoring training and assessment programs of their own. Whilst the stages of peer-mentoring need further evaluation and an effective means of assessment and support pivotal, we believe our findings suggest that peer-mentoring may not only help to address the shortfall in mentors but is an invaluable learning experience that prepares and instils key values, beliefs and principles in young would-be mentors.